Post 21 - Milestone Two plus meeting

We arranged to meet up at 10:30 on Wednesday. Me and Jon were there, but Chris arrived at 13:30. Despite attempting to contact him, he could not be reached. He showed us the UV mapped version of the building, which did show some improvements, although in my opinion was still a little dark. This is something which we noted down. We went through the presentation (made by me) and discussed who would discuss which parts, as well as how to showcase the working prototype.

We presented our presentation and awaited for the client's feedback. It was suggested that we needed to look at the context of the game and how the user would access it. An idea which we thought of was that as it can be made into an executable file, it could be downloaded from the Portland Quarry and Stone Trust website, to allow for an activity to be played with and manipulated. 

Other suggestions were mentioned such as creating a rendered animation of the building falling down. If we cannot solve the game engine problem, then we will consider this, but as the project title is 'Tumbling Tower Activity' we would much prefer to try to get it working. Suggestions of changing the game so that pieces could be picked up, buildings could be rebuilt and even changing it into a 'first person shooting style' of interaction were interesting but in the time we have and the game engine issues taking most of it, we are most likely going to build on what we have started, whilst attempting to look carefully at the context and how people would get a hold of this.

Milestone Two Presentation - http://prezi.com/p2uw5fgg1sl3/group-07-collaborative-practice-milestone-02/

Post 20 - Lag issue update

Chris has been looking into third party applications, which helps in the processing of frame rates. The one he has used in known as 'Fraps' This has somehow enabled Chris to record the game at a slightly faster frame-rate. It is still slow when it is played, but a good effort at improving the current problem and something to explore. If this can be used to run the game to an acceptable speed, this would solve our problems.

Also, after a remote team meeting, we decided that Chris would resume his role as texture developer as he will look into UV mapping. Jon's initial work on texturing the building can be seen in the image below. It is rather dark and it was left at the textures needing to be lighter. However, as Chris has now taken over as texture developer, Jon is the support for texture as well as cameras and movement.

Post 19 - Final Build - Major Lag Issues

The images provided in this post are of the final building, built in Blender. Every item in the scene has been coded with the appropriate logic and psychics, as well as the mouse triggers. As mentioned previously, this has been based on the Leeds Town Hall, as parts of it have been built using Portland stone. This was an epic build, but I was pleased with the outcome.
 
However to my horror, when the game is activated, the frame rate is about 4fps, as supposed to the 50-60fps that it should be. To confirm this issue, the model was uploaded onto a file sharing website, so that Jon and Chris could confirm this. This issue was confirmed and so the group began to look into both the nature of the problem and any possible solutions. 

We all worked on this problem. We sent emails to people for advice, plus looked into forums, databases and manuals for information on this problem. All group members were in constant communication about any information we found or possible areas that we could tweak. We as yet have found both an official cause and a solution. The only conclusion we came up with is that there is simply too much in the game and with each component having a physics and logic script, the game simply cannot process the data to a usable speed.

This is the major problem with the final product as it is a game and requires the ability to interact with it. So as it runs at 4-6 frames per second, it is currently a game which cannot be played. As a lot of work has gone into this, we will continue to look into the problem and seek advice, then respond constructively. I feel that although this issue is a major problem, it has demonstrated a good working structure, and shows that we were all working collaboratively towards a common goal. I am aware that this is how we should be working throughout the process, but this was a personal highlight as this process actively showed it in motion.

Worst case scenario, if it is a matter there being 'too many models in the scene', we could reduce the amount of items in the scene, or recreate the final model in a much more simpler version. However, both these options are drastic and would result in a product that would not be using the game engine's full potential. However, if this is what it comes to, I would rather provide a game/product which works than a good looking product that does not.

As Chris has continued to look into the lag problem, and solutions for getting it to run, Jon has now been tasked with looking into texturing it.

Post 18 - Prototype

As Blender is a rather new software application to me, I wanted to make sure that I was able to:

A) Use it to achieve the project's desired outcome.

B) Experiment with the physics, as well as the process of importing items.

This resulted in me creating a working prototype. The prototype is comprised of 56 pieces which were a series of columns and stone slabs for both the bottom and top of the pillars. Physics and logic was then applied and once working, was then exported as an exe. file (executable, meaning that it was able to be played outside of blender). This was a good start as it ran, was working and gave me confidence to begin the main build.

This was then passed onto the other group members for their feedback. They were pleased with the outcome as it was a working demo.

Post 17 - Week Eight meetings

I attempted a arrange for the group to meet up on the Wednesday of week eight and discuss the project's progression. Neither one of the other party members were available, so had to be postponed until Thursday.

On Thursday, after the Research Practice module, me and Jon had a meeting in order to discuss what tasks needed to be done and to delegate them. Unfortunately, Chris was again unavailable to participate. However, we were in communication with Chris and filled him on any decisions and tasks decided on. After a brief discussion with Nick Cope, who kindly showed me and Jon an example of what can be achieved in the game engine 'Blender', we decided on a realistic pipeline of tasks. These are as follows:

-Attain building models which were already made by all three of the group members (as seen in task one), as well as create additional ones. This would be done using Autodesk's 3Ds Max as it was an application which the whole group have some experience of. 

-Export these items in their individual state and import them into the game / 3d rendering software, Blender. How items are imported into Blender can effect where the central gravitational position is located. It was discovered it would therefore be best to process the items individually.  

-Apply code to each component and construct the building. As the process of creating the building would use the ability to clone items, it makes sense to create the code for an item and then duplicate it, thus duplicating the code and not requiring to apply physics to each and every piece. Also, careful consideration would need to be made for building as when the game engine is started, the physics and logic would kick in.

-Create Portland stone / building textures. A very important part of the process and one which would allow the project to fall within the boundaries of the client brief. 

-Apply additional items. This would include looking into the potential for a free moving camera (so the building could be knocked down from other angles), and slight tweaking of any environment items such as lighting. Also, creating the option to restart the game is an important consideration. 

-Quality Assurance and Evaluation. Although this would take place throughout the build, it is important to establish that the product is in working order and to debug it.

After this breakdown was established, it was decided that I would create the building (modelled after the Leeds Town Hall) and also apply the logic and physics to the individual assets that would need to be imported (as discussed previously, it makes sense form me to import and code the assets as it saves time on creating the psychics code).

This would then be past onto Chris, who would texture the product.

Once texturing was in place, Jon would be in charge of applying a free moving camera, a reset button and assume the 'final testing' role so that any minor issues with any stage of the build could be noted. Chris was informed of the outcome of this meeting and was assigned the role of texturing.

Post 16 - Milestone One

We presented our presentation for milestone one - progress presentation. This went ok and I feel that the presentation was more clear and showed what we had done been up to. But there was a lot of confusion with regards to the augmented considerations. We did not explain this technology clearly, made some assumptions about what the client already new (points which I feel I have learned now taken on board). In a previous meeting, we were advised to focus on the modelling and as a result of keeping our options open / modelling, the presentation was met with concern. It is very important to now concentrate on picking one project, or outcome. The general consensus of the group was to go with the 'tumbling tower' idea, over the augmented idea. But what also is important is that in the next two weeks, we experiment with what we have already produced and not only create a working prototype, but get it as complete as possible, in time for milestone two. This is in week 9. As the group have many hand in dates looming, the project has been put on hold and will be reconvened after thee hand ins.

After the presentation, the animating and game engine software Blender was mentioned by Nick Cope, since Chris has used this before.

Post 15 - Prezi Presentation

I have just finished the presentation for the week seven progress report. I have used the open source software Prezi as it has so far proved to be very fitting and easy to use. A link to the presentation can be found at the bottom of the page. We scheduled a meeting for Monday afternoon, which lasted about two hours. This was to show both Jon and Chris the presentation and discuss as a group who would tackle each section. It was decided that I would begin and end the presentation, Chris would talk about our progress between week five and seven, and Jon would talk about the modelling and content that we had started on. This would include a section on both the game idea as well as the augmented idea, but focus on the modelling and flexibility of the pieces. It was also suggested that we purchase some simple building blocks and stick 'markers' on them to demonstrate how the augmented project would work. We have also included a very short video of how the tumbling tower idea would look and the reasoning behind way each piece would be segmented. We left the meeting with a good understanding of what was expected of one another. I pointed out that if there were any alterations to make, or problems, to let me know in order to amend the presentation.

Here is an image which was mocked up after it was initially made, showing that have also considered augmented reality and some of the implications, such as the angle the web cam would need to be at, and where the markers would be placed. When this image is up on the presentation is when we will get out the blocks as a demonstration to the client/s 

Presentation link: http://prezi.com/d4j2vu9hx-me/collaborative-practice-week-seven/

Post 14 - Building Construction

In order to give the 'client' a good idea of what we have been up to and to avoid any confusion, we set ourselves the task of creating a couple of buildings. As time was upon us and I had began the first step of creating the a building, I suggested to the group that we should all contribute to making the same building, rather than make three. This idea was agreed upon, so I built my section of the building and passed it onto Jon, who then constructed an additional layer. This was then passed onto Chris, who then added the roof with a tower and began to experiment with uv mapping, which is a form of texturing. Image one is my contribution, image two is when Jon added his additional level and image three is after Chris added his roof, tower and began to texture.

My building contribution

Jon's extra level addition (with extra pillars)

Chris's roof and tower addition (with textures)

I feel as though this demonstrates a good collaborative exercise and shows that we can collectively produce something for the development of the final product. Although the texturing is not representative of Portland stone at this stage, it does show the capabilities of the team should give the client an idea into our progress up to the present. The next task is to create the presentation for the week seven progress report, which I shall do in the next 24 hours.

These building and asset images can be found by following this link:

Picasa web link: http://picasaweb.google.com/RobertDyke1985/CollaborativePractice#

Post 13 - Model Additions

After the group's meeting, I set out to split up my arch model into smaller pieces. Here is the result.


 I also then went away and looked back at some of the photos I took of the Civic Hall. I concentrated on creating a couple of wall variants and was influenced by the civic hall design. Here are the finished prototypes.

Post 12 - Second meeting with Nick Cope

During the week six collaborative practice session, we had a meeting with Nick Cope. We discussed both options of the 'tumbling tower' idea as well as the 'augmented activity' idea in a little more detail. We showed him the building assets we had created and after discussion with him, it was decided that the assets needed to be disseminated and cut up into smaller pieces. The reason for this is so that if it were put into a tumbling activity, the pieces would fall a little more naturally and when considering augmented reality, the blocks would have to be a similar size to the blocks which the markers would be put on. We had a meeting after the session to discuss what each member of the group would do. It was decided that we would all split our own models up and create a couple more building blocks, for variation. The idea would be that once we had created our updated pieces, we would supply one another with them and create a simple structure each. I was tasked with creating the Progress Report presentation for week seven.

Post 11 - Arch Model

Here is an image of an arch plus a couple of variants as my contribution to the project for week 6. I have also been sent and seen Chris's 'Rooftop' triangle shape which also looks very good.